Ivy v. Ivy
| Docket Number: | 2001-CA-01852-COA | |
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 01-06-2004 Opinion Author: McMillin, C.J. Holding: Affirmed |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Divorce: Irreconcilable differences - Child custody Judge(s) Concurring: King and Southwick, P.JJ., Bridges, Thomas, Lee, Irving, Myers, Chandler and Griffis, JJ. Procedural History: Bench Trial Nature of the Case: CIVIL - CUSTODY |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 10-30-2001 Appealed from: Lowndes County Chancery Court Judge: Robert L. Lancaster Disposition: AWARDED DEFENDANT PHYSICAL CUSTODY OF CHILDREN Case Number: 2000-0361 |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | |||
| Appellant: | Marty H. Ivy |
HARVEY LEE MORRISON
JOSEPH JOSHUA STEVENS |
||
| Appellee: | Tina L. Ivy | J. TYSON GRAHAM |
|
|
Synopsis provided by:  If you are interested in subscribing to the weekly synopses of all Mississippi Supreme Court and Court of Appeals hand downs please contact Tammy Upton in the MLI Press office. |
|
| Topic: | Divorce: Irreconcilable differences - Child custody |
| Summary of the Facts: | Marty Ivy and Tina Ivy were granted a divorce for irreconcilable differences. The chancellor awarded the parties joint legal custody of their two children with primary physical custody being given to Tina. Marty appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Marty argues that the chancellor failed to properly evaluate the relevant factors affecting the physical custody determination. The chancellor found that continuity of care prior to the separation favored Tina since she had been the primary caregiver while Marty worked to earn money for family finances and that Tina’s parenting skills, based on the fact that she had served as the primary caregiver, favored her. The chancellor some preference to Tina on the willingness to be the primary caregiver since she had demonstrated her willingness to act in that role by actively doing so for a long period of time prior to the break-up of the marriage. The chancellor concluded that employment factors favored Tina since Marty worked extended hours that would prevent him from devoting time to the children. The chancellor found that the emotional ties between parent and child favored Tina to some degree because of the emotional link between her and the children that had been established through her years of acting as their primary caregiver. With regard to the remaining factors, the chancellor found that they favored neither party. Because there is evidence in the record to support these findings and conclusions by the chancellor, he did not abuse his discretion. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
